Type in the content of your page here.
A Disabled student and Related Services..Discussion Questions 1-5:
1. Is Young's decision defensible? Why or why not?
Young's decision is defensible. It would have been a stronger "case" for the school district IF she had NOT mentioned the expense factor. Money should not be used as a defense for why a district feels they are not the most suitable placement for a severally disabled student. Young would best have been served by simply stating that the school is not the most appropriate placement for Johnathan. Without any knowledge of where/how Johnathan had been educated prior to his sophomore year it is difficult to determine exactly how defensible this situation will be for the district. What was the prior IEP and how was the child receiving his education prior to this school year? Debbie Young has the experience of being a special education teacher as well as being a "seasoned" administrator. It can be assumed she has a good understanding of the laws associated with Special Education and the interpersonal communication skills required to serve in an administrative role. Another key factor would be deciding if these related services would help provide Jonathan the opportunity to receive passing marks and advance from grade to grade. Even with these related services, Jonathan may very well not receive passing marks or continue to move up in grade through the school.
2. Is the parent's request reasonable under the law? Why or why not?
The parent's request may seem reasonable in regards to the laws surrounding special education students. Based on PL 94-142 all children ages 3-21 are entitled to a free and appropriate public education, consistent with their needs. Subsequently the IDEA and IDEIA acts both support this law and require public schools to do everything in their power to provide children an appropriate education in a least restrictive environment. A parent may see their child's needs being best met in a public school. However, it is hard to determine what/who determines reasonableness. The final decision in a case such as this will lie in the courts.
3. Is the provision of a nurse a related service if it is necessary for Johnathan to receive an appropriate education? Why or why not?
No.....a related service is viewed as one that must be provided to allow the child with disabilities to benefit from special education. This can be a single service or an entire range of services/programs that may be needed to benefit the child. The case of Tatro is an example of the idea of related services. A school district will be required to provide simple medical procedures under the catagory of "related services" when such a procedure does NOT require complex mastery and the services are necessary for the child to benefit from an appropriate special education program. In this case the procedures that would need to be done with Johnathan require a nurse with "specialized training". It also is not clear that Johnathan will benefit in any way with this person by his side throughout the day. Again, there are unanswered questions in regards to his prior education and what is stated on his IEP. If it is assmumed that prior to this point he was either not in public schools or was in a type of program/school that had this nurse provision than it would be difficult to make the case for Johnathan and his parents. In both the Tatro and the case of Garrett the point of a medical services exclusion is stated. This case would be an example of how that is not the school districts requirement.
4. How do you think a court would rule in this case? Provide a rationale for your response.
We think a court would rule in favor of the school district. A "least resitrictive environment" is truly a relative concept which is shown and stated over and over in the cases presented in chapter 5. The courts held for the district in the case of Beth and the North Suburban Special Education School District. The district did not intentionally discriminate against Beth and was not in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. I also think the courts ruling in the Tatro and the Garrett case would be part of the decision. The Tatro case provided a two-step analysis of of the related services definition which might be in favor of the school district.
5. What are the administrative implications of this case?
The implications are as follows:
*A lack of funds should NOT be used by school districts as a basis to deny children with disabilities a public education.
*School districts should be certain that they clearly understand the difference between medical services and related services.
Parental rights must be repected and addressed in matters relating to evaluation and IEP development.
School districts may be assessed attorney fees under the Handicapped Children's Protection Act, if a parent prevails in a suit for a violation of IDEA.
If the court ruled in favor of Jonathan than that would open up the schools to be required to serve anybody regardless of physical state. I think that this would be a large area of concern as school districts are not equipped to handle all students and not all students belong in the normalized school setting. Unfortunately, many people are born with conditions that make it impossible for them to move through the schooling system with their peers. I believe that these students should be taught life skills so that they can function to the best of their abilities in society. Expecting the school district to educate them similarly to their peers is doing an injustice to the student.
A Disabled student and Related Services..Discussion Questions 1-5:
1. Is Young's decision defensible? Why or why not?
Young's decision is defensible. It would have been a stronger "case" for the school district IF she had NOT mentioned the expense factor. Money should not be used as a defense for why a district feels they are not the most suitable placement for a severally disabled student. Young would best have been served by simply stating that the school is not the most appropriate placement for Johnathan. Without any knowledge of where/how Johnathan had been educated prior to his sophomore year it is difficult to determine exactly how defensible this situation will be for the district. What was the prior IEP and how was the child receiving his education prior to this school year? Debbie Young has the experience of being a special education teacher as well as being a "seasoned" administrator. It can be assumed she has a good understanding of the laws associated with Special Education and the interpersonal communication skills required to serve in an administrative role. Another key factor would be deciding if these related services would help provide Jonathan the opportunity to receive passing marks and advance from grade to grade. Even with these related services, Jonathan may very well not receive passing marks or continue to move up in grade through the school.
2. Is the parent's request reasonable under the law? Why or why not?
The parent's request may seem reasonable in regards to the laws surrounding special education students. Based on PL 94-142 all children ages 3-21 are entitled to a free and appropriate public education, consistent with their needs. Subsequently the IDEA and IDEIA acts both support this law and require public schools to do everything in their power to provide children an appropriate education in a least restrictive environment. A parent may see their child's needs being best met in a public school. However, it is hard to determine what/who determines reasonableness. The final decision in a case such as this will lie in the courts.
3. Is the provision of a nurse a related service if it is necessary for Johnathan to receive an appropriate education? Why or why not?
No.....a related service is viewed as one that must be provided to allow the child with disabilities to benefit from special education. This can be a single service or an entire range of services/programs that may be needed to benefit the child. The case of Tatro is an example of the idea of related services. A school district will be required to provide simple medical procedures under the catagory of "related services" when such a procedure does NOT require complex mastery and the services are necessary for the child to benefit from an appropriate special education program. In this case the procedures that would need to be done with Johnathan require a nurse with "specialized training". It also is not clear that Johnathan will benefit in any way with this person by his side throughout the day. Again, there are unanswered questions in regards to his prior education and what is stated on his IEP. If it is assmumed that prior to this point he was either not in public schools or was in a type of program/school that had this nurse provision than it would be difficult to make the case for Johnathan and his parents. In both the Tatro and the case of Garrett the point of a medical services exclusion is stated. This case would be an example of how that is not the school districts requirement.
4. How do you think a court would rule in this case? Provide a rationale for your response.
We think a court would rule in favor of the school district. A "least resitrictive environment" is truly a relative concept which is shown and stated over and over in the cases presented in chapter 5. The courts held for the district in the case of Beth and the North Suburban Special Education School District. The district did not intentionally discriminate against Beth and was not in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. I also think the courts ruling in the Tatro and the Garrett case would be part of the decision. The Tatro case provided a two-step analysis of of the related services definition which might be in favor of the school district.
5. What are the administrative implications of this case?
The implications are as follows:
*A lack of funds should NOT be used by school districts as a basis to deny children with disabilities a public education.
*School districts should be certain that they clearly understand the difference between medical services and related services.
If the court ruled in favor of Jonathan than that would open up the schools to be required to serve anybody regardless of physical state. I think that this would be a large area of concern as school districts are not equipped to handle all students and not all students belong in the normalized school setting. Unfortunately, many people are born with conditions that make it impossible for them to move through the schooling system with their peers. I believe that these students should be taught life skills so that they can function to the best of their abilities in society. Expecting the school district to educate them similarly to their peers is doing an injustice to the student.